Ascribing value to ecological processes: An economic view of environmental change

Forest Ecology and Management

Volumn 114, Issue 2-3, 1999, Pages 329-338

  Schaberg, Rex H ^a   Holmes, Thomas P ^b   Lee, Karen J ^b   Abt, Robert C ^a  

^a NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b USDA FOREST SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

Environmental economics; Non market benefits; Trade off analysis

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; FOREST MANAGEMENT;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 0033593845     PISSN: 03781127     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-1127(98)00363-6     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Addleman S. Orthogonal main-effect plans for asymmetrical factorial experiments. Technometrics. 4(1):1962;21-46.
2. Berck P. The economics of timber: A renewable resource in the long run. Bell Journal. 10(2):1979;447-462.
3. Binkley, C.S., 1981. Timber supply from non-industrial forests. Bull 92. School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, New Haven, CT, p. 97.
4. Birch, T.W., 1996. Private forest-land owners of the United States, 1994. Res. Bulletin NE-134. USDA Forest Service Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. Radnor, PA.
5. Christensen, N.L., Bartuska, A.M., Brown, J.H., Carpenter, S., D'Antonio, F., C.R., Franklin, J.F., MacMahon, J.A., Noss, R.A., Parsons, D.J., Peterson, C.H., Turner, M.G., Woodmansee, R.G., 1995. The Report of the Ecological Society of American Committee on the Scientific Basis for Ecosystem Management. The Ecological Society of America, Washington DC.
6. Crawford H.S., Marchington R.L. A habitat suitability index for white-tailed deer in the piedmont. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry. 13(1):1989;12-16.
7. Dennis D.F. An economic analysis of harvest behavior: Integrating forest and ownership characteristics. Forest Science. 35(4):1989;1088-1104.
8. Dillman, D.A., 1978. Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method. Wiley, New York, p. 325.
9. Faustmann, M., 1849. On the determination of the value which forest land and immature stands pose for forestry. In: Gane, M. (Ed.), Martin Faustmann and the Evolution of Discounted Cash Flow. Paper 42. Oxford Institute. Oxford, England, 1968, p. 54.
10. Fecso, R.S., Kaiser, H.F., Royer, J.P., Weidenhammer, M., 1982. Management practices and reforestation decisions for harvested southern pinelands. Staff Rept. AGE5821230. USDA Statistical Reporting Service. Washington DC, p. 74.
11. Green, P.E., Wind, Y., 1973. Multiattribute Decisions in Marketing, A Measurement Approach. The Dryden Press Hindale, IL, p. 396.
12. Green P.E., Wind Y. New ways to measure consumer's judgements. Harvard Business Review. 53:1975;107-117.
13. Greene, W.H., 1993. Econometric Analysis. Macmillan, New York, p. 791.
14. Hartman R. The harvesting decision when a standing forest has value. Economic Inquiry. 14:1976;52-58.
15. Kessler W.B., Salwasser H., Cartwright C.W. Jr., Caplan C.A. New perspectives for sustainable natural resource management. Ecological Applications. 2(3):1992;221-225.
16. Newman D.H., Wear D.N. The production economics of private forestry: A comparison of industrial and non-industrial forest owners. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 75:1993;674-684.
17. Palmquist, R.B., 1991. Hedonic methods. In: Braden, J.B., Kolstad, C.D. (Eds.), Measuring the Demand for Environmental Quality, Chap. 4, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 77-120.
18. Robertson, F.D., 1992. Ecosystem Management of the National Forests and Grasslands. Memo of 4 June 1992 to Regional Foresters and Station Directors.
19. Rosen S. Hedonic prices and implicit markets: Product differentiation in pure competition. Journal of Political Economy. 82(1):1974;34-55.
20. Rudis V.A., Gramann J.H., Ruddell E.J. Westphal. J.M., Forest inventory and management-based visual preference models of southern pine stands. Forest Science. 34:1988;846-863.
21. Samuelson P.A. Economics of forestry in an evolving society. Economic Inquiry. 15:1976;466-492.
22. Sheffield, R.M., 1981. Multiresource inventories: Techniques for evaluating non-game bird habitat. Res. Paper SE-218. USDA Forest Service Southeastern Forest Experiment Station. Asheville, NC, p. 28.